''Official aspirations for landmine removal in Karen State are occurring alongside deeply- held community anxieties that their removal will increase the presence of militarised actors. Such tensions reflect a contrast between national/international efforts to promote humanitarian mine action and community fears that such actions are part of strategies to remove a line of defence and deterrence. The continued presence of militarised actors in ceasefire areas threatens to result in these actors further expanding their networks of militarised power over areas of community controlled resources. Given the fact that parties to the ceasefire have not progressed significantly towards an agreement on security governance reform, it should not come as a surprise that, as a primary issue related to security, agreement on the removal of landmines has been delayed. As a part of the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) signed in October 2015 between the Union Government and nine Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs, three of which are present within Karen State), negotiation on security sector reform, termed, “security reintegration processes,” was noted by commentators and those party to the ceasefire early in negotiations as a difficult subject to discuss. While such difficulties have not yet reached the position of a negative peace, they underline the patience that is required to negotiate and unravel preferences for security sector reform in the peace process. Despite the differing viewpoints held by parties to the ceasefire, this article seeks to highlight the potential role of mine action as a crucial link between security governance and political dialogue, one that might revitalise negotiations by identifying potential commonalities within the political dialogue...''